|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 9, 2011 0:39:01 GMT -5
WTF is wrong with these people? This is like a Michelle Obama shopping trip... The U.S. Treasury is depleting its cash at an accelerating pace, drawing down its cash balance by $81.6 billion in the just the first four days of March, leaving the federal government with only $108.9 billion on hand, according to the Daily Treasury Statement released Monday afternoon. At the beginning of February, the Treasury had $349.1 billion in cash on hand, but spent that down by $158.5 billion during the month, ending February with only $190.6 billion on hand. Were the government to continue to draw down its cash balance at the $20.4 billion-per-day rate that prevailed in the first four days of March, it would spend its way through its final $108.9 billion in little more than five days. Under current law, the U.S. Treasury may only run the national debt up to $14.294 trillion. At the end of February, according to the Treasury’s Monthly Statement of the Public Debt, the total debt subject to this legal limit was $14.142331 trillion—just $151.669 billion short of the limit. Had the Treasury not spent down the $81.6 billion in its cash balance in the first four days of this month and borrowed that money instead, it would have significantly reduced its remaining legal borrowing authority. For the Treasury to borrow more than the current $14.294-trillion limit, Congress and President Barack Obama will need to enact new legislation authorizing the Treasury to increase the national debt up to whatever new limit they find agreeable. www.cnsnews.com/news/article/us-treasury-drew-down-its-cash-balance-8
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 9, 2011 1:37:27 GMT -5
So you going to help them out with a short term loan ed??
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 9, 2011 1:43:52 GMT -5
I don't loan to deadbeats...
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 9, 2011 10:55:06 GMT -5
Can you really criticize the spending without discussing how the money was spent? That is like criticizing an individual for spending 1/2 their monthly budget in 1 day, while choosing to overlook the fact that the money was used to pay their rent. Tell me what the money was spent on & then we can have a discussion if it was wasteful spending.
|
|
Bluerobin
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Posts: 17,345
Location: NEPA
|
Post by Bluerobin on Mar 9, 2011 12:05:03 GMT -5
So, how much are we still spending on Bush's wars?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 9, 2011 12:07:00 GMT -5
Agree, Angel. Without knowing where the money was spent, this entire discussion is meaningless.
|
|
cherit
Initiate Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:47:25 GMT -5
Posts: 59
|
Post by cherit on Mar 9, 2011 12:59:52 GMT -5
Why are they Bush's wars? Doesn't congress have to approve us going to war, and at the time were we not under a Democratic led congress? Please let me know if am wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:49:58 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2011 13:09:00 GMT -5
Why are they Bush's wars? Doesn't congress have to approve us going to war, and at the time were we not under a Democratic led congress? Please let me know if am wrong. yeah right... when was the last time congress voted for us to go to war?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 9, 2011 13:25:06 GMT -5
Why are they Bush's wars? Doesn't congress have to approve us going to war, and at the time were we not under a Democratic led congress? Please let me know if am wrong. I'm sorry, cherit, but you're wrong. You asked to be let know, so I'm letting you know. You need to do some research regarding our tendency to get involved in skirmishes around the world without any vote from congress that would put us, officially, at war.
|
|
cherit
Initiate Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:47:25 GMT -5
Posts: 59
|
Post by cherit on Mar 9, 2011 13:54:09 GMT -5
Fair enough. I was under the impression that it had to not necessarily be a vote per se, but that they had to approve it.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 9, 2011 13:57:46 GMT -5
Congress did not approve a formal declaration of war, but they did vote numerous times to continue funding the war operations. Any Democrat in congress who voted to fund the war (and that was most of them) has ZERO credibility in criticizing it as an "unnecessary war" or "Bush's war". If it was unnecessary, then why the hell did you keep voting to fund it, you hypocritical asshole?
|
|